Tree ordering when displaying [#275268]

First, I'd like to congratulate your work. It's almost unbelievable the progress that we had in 2 days of your dedication on this module. Thank you very much!

Now a request (and I really don't know if I have to put it as a bug or a feature, since it's working but not in a good way)...

When displaying the node, the values of field are not ordering like the tree I planned before. Got bizarre orderings like 1-3-2 or 2-3-1 for a 3-level taxonomy tree, I don't know what is the standard (if there is one). Would it be possible to orderer the output to something like 1-2-3 or 3-2-1?

Thanks again!

Comments

Comment #1

Wim Leers

Ghent 🇧🇪🇪🇺

CreditAttribution: Wim Leers commented 26 June 2008 at 13:55

Status:

Active

» Postponed (maintainer needs more info)

I'm not sure what you mean here… I think you're talking about term weights? If that's the case: yes, the weights are respected and that will not change.

Please clarify using one of the trees listed at the bottom of this page: http://wimleers.com/demo/hierarchical-select.

Comment #2

Vuds CreditAttribution: Vuds commented 26 June 2008 at 14:10

No, it's really about the tree ordering. A example using your vocabulary:

Aston Martin
-DB9
-Vanquish S
BMW
-3 series
--318i
--325i
-7 series
--714i
Mercedes
-A-Klasse
-M-Klasse

Let's say I choose BMW -> 3 series -> 325i (saving the lineage) and send it. When I go to view the node (display, whatever, but not editing), it shows me something like that:

Car:
3 series (2nd level)
BMW (1st level)
325i (3rd level)

I think that a common sense to be expected to display the data would be:

Car:
BMW (1st level)
3 series (2nd level)
325i (3rd level)

If I put the dropbox to choose multiple lineages, it mess all between lineages too!

Comment #3

Wim Leers

Ghent 🇧🇪🇪🇺

CreditAttribution: Wim Leers commented 26 June 2008 at 14:14

Status:

Postponed (maintainer needs more info)

» Closed (won't fix)

The display of that data is un-hierarchical by default. It just orders them alphabetically... You'll have to fix that in the theming layer, I'm afraid. Or use a content_taxonomy CCK field and write a new (better) formatter.

Comment #4

Vuds CreditAttribution: Vuds commented 26 June 2008 at 15:51

Hmmmm ok :/

Just a correction, it may not to be alphabetical... in one test of mine, a location field, I'm getting "Buenos Aires" (2nd level) displayed before "Argentina" (1st level).

I started thinking about a solution using computed field... If I get any conclusion, I'll post here.

Thanks!